Mammy’s Rule: It Ain’t Fittin’

Regardless of Gone With the Wind’s undeniable racial stereotyping, I think that Mammy is the most consistently reasonable and admirable character in that book/movie. And I also think that her famous “rule” is by far the best way to measure the acceptability of statues, place names, etc. Let’s simply ask ourselves: is the PURPOSE of this statue/name “fittin’” for the PLACE/TIME in which it is situated? Is it fittin’ to honor a vice president of the Confederacy in the U.S. Capitol in 2020? No. (Because this statue’s PURPOSE is to glorify and legitimize racism and rebellion—and such a message is not acceptable in this place, at this time.)

On the other hand, is it fittin’ to honor crusader king St. Louis with a statue in a city named for him? Yes, I think so. (Because this statue’s PURPOSE is to encourage a city to take pride in the saintly virtues of its eponymous patron—not to glorify or advocate Louis IX’s anti-semitism.) 

Mammy’s rule should also be applied to names. Was Austin, Texas, for example, given that name because Stephen Austin was an advocate and defender of slavery? Certainly not, though he was both—but rather, because he is regarded as the “Father of Texas” (as unlikable a showman as he probably was). 

Sometimes, a thing is fittin’ even if you don’t like it, people! And sometimes, as Mammy would say, a thing—like, for instance, Miss Scarlett showing her bosom before three o’clock—well, that just AIN’T fittin’ (at least, for a barbecue given for plantation gentry in 1861). Yes, I admit, there IS a measure of relativity—time and place—involved in Mammy’s rule. So be it. It’s still the most fittin’ rule I can think of for these unruly and iconoclastic times.